FISA court expected to rule that President can wiretap without a court order.
FISA court expected to rule that President can wiretap without a court order.
The New York Times reports that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is expected to issue a major ruling validating “the power of the president and Congress to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a court order,”even when U.S. residents’ personal communications are involved:
In validating the government’s wide authority to collect foreign intelligence, it may offer legal credence to the Bush administration’s repeated assertions that the president has constitutional authority to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping.
Separately, in his confirmation hearing today, Attorney General nominee Eric Holder said the President cannot violate FISA:
FEINGOLD: Is there anything in the FISA statute that makes you believe that the president has the ability under some other inherent power to disregard the FISA statute?
HOLDER: No, I do not see that in the FISA statute.
Watch it:
“I think that’s a very important break in favor of the rule of law that we’ve been waiting for in this country for many years,” remarked Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI).
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Whoa! Back that truck up.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:46 pmCan they do this? My gut tells me this is seriously wrong and against our constitution to boot.
That does it. It’s time to dismantle the FISA court and start over with a new one. Preferably made up of justices familiar with the Fourth Amendment. I cannot believe that they can find an exception in the Constitution that would allow Bush to violate our civil rights with impunity.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:49 pmBOMB BOMB BOMB TERRORIST THREAT BOMB BOMB
There, now, happy to take a peak at my personal communications? Go ahead and waste your time fellas. Fat lot of good it will do ya.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:50 pmThanx russ feingold , I hope your right !
January 15th, 2009 at 2:51 pmDo Federal judges ever actually read the American constitution before they issue their rulings ?
RandomChaos Says:
Can they do this?
Any court can rule that they don’t have any authority. They can also sit up, roll over and play dead if they want to. Now that they’re ruling themselves irrelevant, I guess they can pack up and “do their jobs” from a tropical beach somewhere.
We can also reduce their salaries to $0, since they are essentially abdicating their jobs.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:53 pmHow does this ruling apply to the NSA’s collection of 10’s of millions of innocent Americans phone records domestically in the worlds largest electronic data base .
January 15th, 2009 at 2:56 pmThe goal of which according to USA’s source is “to collect a record of every phone call ever made within the nations borders “
BAD NEWS FOR REPUGLICANS….BUT THANKS….FOR MAKING OBAMA THE MOST POWERFUL PRESIDENT IN HISTORY
January 15th, 2009 at 2:59 pmThis must be those activist judges the far right keeps whining about.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:01 pmNah, it couldn’t be that because the “time table” problem is a fantasy.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:04 pmThe only way these goons can uphold the law is to break it. How is that not defeating the purpose?
January 15th, 2009 at 3:06 pmLooks like another end run around the Constitution in the waning days of the neocons…
January 15th, 2009 at 3:08 pmYou know if they pass such a law it will be our collective responsibility to encrypt all our emails. It’s actually quite easy. The only ones looking out for US now may be us…
January 15th, 2009 at 3:10 pmTracy__5 Says:
…the whole “time table” problem with getting warrants issued is valid.
Your Stupid is showing again Tracy…they can do it at any time and get a warrant after the fact.
How come everything you post is so damned ignorant?
January 15th, 2009 at 3:12 pmThey promised Bush they would get this through before his term ends.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:14 pmTracy__5 Says:
Maybe they finally realized that the whole “time table” problem with getting warrants issued is valid.
Good. We can spy on the set of “24″.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:18 pmTracy__5 Says:
Maybe they finally realized that the whole “time table” problem with getting warrants issued is valid.
You know that isn’t true. But tell us. How many terrorist plots were stopped because they illegally and unconstitutionally tapped your phone calls? They did tap your phones. You understand that, don’t you?
January 15th, 2009 at 3:18 pmi don’t believe this court’s ruling is on FISA per se. Rather, I believe it is a decision concerning the Protect America Act (or some other, equally inanely named act) and will say that the law, as passed by Congress, was constitutional.
With all things FISA related, it’s good to keep in mind that we’re no longer talking about just FISA, but all the other legislation that Republicans, AND Democrats, have passed to allow W to keep doing what he was doing. In the end, most of Congress has been complicit in the gutting of the Constitution. But then, the Constitution does have that word “unreasonable” in it. Ain’t the law grand.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:20 pmHow about my mail is that covered too ? It was enacted as was the loss of posse comitatus through the use of a presidential signing statement .
January 15th, 2009 at 3:21 pmTracey_5; Please get yourself to the nearest ER to have your head removed from your ass.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:21 pmOh, and there’s NEVER been a timetable problem. All of the laws — both followed and broken — allowed the executive branch to tap first and apply later. Another Unitary Executive myth (like torture works) that just doesn’t go away.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:21 pmGee, is there nostalgia in the air today for beating the constitution?
Supreme Court OKs Use of Illegally Obtained Evidence
(Newser) – The Supreme Court today ruled that evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution is admissible in court, Bloomberg reports, in a 5-4 vote along ideological lines. The court ruled that prosecutors could try an Alabama man who was found to be carrying methamphetamine and a pistol when he was accidentally arrested in 2004 due to a clerical error.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:23 pmSnail mail that is .
January 15th, 2009 at 3:23 pmAs for the FISA court’s expected decision, if the President can wiretap, then he or she should do it themselves. No delegating authority to minions.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:25 pmI forgot to mention, John Roberts put on his usual “I won the spelling bee!” smile after the ruling. Those conservatives, so much happier than libruls!
January 15th, 2009 at 3:25 pmIn this day and age, it is vital to ensure the security of all of your communications. Your daily internet surfing should be done behind an ‘anonymizer’ at all times. Use encryption as a habit. Understand that every cell phone call you make probably will be used in a court of law against you.
All of your comments on blogs is being reviewed and categorized. In a few years, the government will be able to track your every move using cameras, bank cards (ATM), credit cards, cell phones, shopping/internet habits, DMV records, prescription drug usage, psychological appointments, school records, library records, employment records, etc…
We are absolutely alone – nobody will step up to assist you, except folks in the same position as yourself. Count on business and government to combine and create ’security alliances’ using mercenaries and spies.
I know it sounds paranoid, but this is our future and there will be no may around it, short of dropping off the grid entirely.
Next up is a TeeVee that watches you. The ‘big brother’ thinks it is saving us, but in reality it is enslaving us.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:27 pmDoes this mean we can wiretap calls between Paraquay and, oh, say, Montana? There might be some interesting tid bits learned about a past assault on America.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:28 pmThe NEW FISA law (anybody remember HR6304?), passed last summer, changed even WHO THE FISA COURT IS.
These folks weren’t determining the ‘constitutionality’ of the new FISA law, they were simply interpreting what the new law says.
And BTW, Obama voted in favor of the new FISA. ( no trolls please, I was as anti-McPalin as most of you.)
January 15th, 2009 at 3:30 pmit may offer legal credence to the Bush administration’s repeated assertions that the president has constitutional authority to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping.
There’s the thing that concerns me. If they’re saying that Article 2 trumps FISA, then Article 2 trumps everything and we now live in a de facto fascist dictatorship.
Of course the claim that the President has “special war powers” exists nowhere in the Constitution – at least, wherever it does exist, it is extremely well defined. But even if open-ended powers did exist, we are not legally at war. Congress did not declare war; rather, it passed a resolution authorizing specific uses of force by the President, which were also well-defined.
The thing that bugs me about this so much is that the Judicial branch of government seems to be refusing to claim the power that rightfully belongs to it, allowing that power to fall by default into Executive branch. We’ve complained often and enough about the Legislative branch doing the same thing over and over again, but they’re not the only ones.
As the FISA court exists for no other purpose, such a ruling would effectively amount to disbanding themselves.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:30 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
Does this mean we can wiretap calls between Paraquay and, oh, say, Montana? There might be some interesting tid bits learned about a past assault on America.
Of course not! The laws only apply to the pedestrian masses, not those who create the rules. A new dawn has broken in Amerikkka, and it is not even close to the visions of the founding fathers.
Government doesn’t have to work harder and smarter to keep us safe, we have to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights to keep us safe. That is the predominant feeling in the Village and the pundits. That is also why nobody will be held accountable for the lawbreaking of the last 8 years. We have kings, and we have the rest of us.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:34 pmTracy, are playing dumb, or are you really ignorant of that which you speak? Either way, I feel compelled to point out that there is no “time table” problem with getting warrants issued. There is a 72 hour grace period in which to go to the FISA court retroactively after doing a wiretap.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:36 pmFeingold remains a voice of reason. He’s about the only Congress Critter to uphold the Constitution these past 8 years.
I agree that the FISA Judges just ruled themselves out of their salaries.
Mr. Obama has a daunting challenge facing him. Upholding the Constitution when parasites like Scalia sit on the SCOTUS is not going to be easy.
Thanks, Senator Feingold. You’re a true Patriot.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:36 pm**head hung in contrition and submission**
I’m sorry, StratRat, I forgot my place.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:38 pmThis raises a much larger threat: how to prevent dilution of the Constitution and erosion of the separation of powers when the bench is now so heavily weighted towards (activist) conservative judges?
FDR threatened to pack the court. The Constitution allows for impeachment of Supreme Court Justices.
Somehow, I doubt Obama has the stomach (or the support) for either fight.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:44 pmOh, it’s the rarely used clause at the end of Article II that says sometimes the president is above the law. People forget about it because 41 didn’t need to use it, one forgot and resigned but it was retro-actively applied by his successor. The 43rd can’t do anything without it.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:44 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
**head hung in contrition and submission**
I’m sorry, StratRat, I forgot my place.
You are one of the good ones PLC. I knew you would understand. If the country were a bus, we would have to sit in the back.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:45 pmBushCo…so many laws to break, so little time.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:48 pmUh, hello? In case you have forgotten, the new and improved FISA law, that Obama voted for gives sweeping powers to wiretap everyone and their grandma without a warrant and immunizes all telcoms that assist in violating people’s rights.
So, yeah, if the Obama administration follows the law, they will be doing warrantless wiretaps.
Thanks Obama. Thanks Holder.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:53 pmHe’s being slippery here. Go look up some info about the new FISA statute. People want to think “warrants” when they hear “FISA” but the NSA or the DOJ can spy on someone for 120 days before getting court approval now.
“Will you follow the law that says you can spy on people without court permission for 120 days and then we’ll rubber stamp approval after that?”
“Yes, sir!”
“Good. You are a true patriot!”
January 15th, 2009 at 5:58 pmI think the 4th ammendment is still in the constitution that Obama is going to swear to uphold next tuesday, right?
January 15th, 2009 at 6:20 pmDoes this foreign surveillance court supersede the Constitution? It seems that everything now trumps the Constitution. Bush is probably right. “It’s just a dam piece of paper.”
WE give lip service to the law and rights, but we don’t really mean it. The average person knows less than nothing about the Constitution except a few laws. But they have no desire to protect it. They forget that if they don’t understand what those freedoms entail, they cannot hope to keep them.
Our legislators don’t care.They passed every egregious thing that Bush asked for. And other than a few of them, they all gave our rights away. And in the process weakened their own as well.
The Congress and Senate are full of stupid, greedy, lazy legislators. And we keep re-electing them. No wonder they don’t respect anything, especially us.
January 15th, 2009 at 6:37 pmWhat would be the point? Just a formality? You aren’t suggesting that they can’t use the wiretapping information untill the warrant is approved….are you?
No, the point was that the Government could not tap any and all phone lines and start ‘data-mining’ which is exactly what they wanted to do (and did) so they pretended the time issue was the problem and the reason they needed FISA 2, when in fact the FISA law specifically addressed the time issue. See shoeless’ comment above.
January 15th, 2009 at 7:04 pmWhat they could do is start tapping an individual phone, go to the FISA court at any time during the next 72 hours and have that wiretap declared legal, and then use that information in court.
As you so cleverly point out, if you don’t plan on using the information in court- you don’t really need a warrant. The NSA has been listening to everything for years.
But if you need to go to the FISA court and apply for a warrant and the only reason you can offer is that you picked up a ‘hit’ on this line during your massive data-mining project, well then that’s illegal and inadmissible in a court of law.
Hence, FISA 2…
Pretty good explanation here, Tracy…
January 15th, 2009 at 7:08 pmhttp://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/15/fisa/
Tracy__5 blathers…
This quote pretty much says it all. That is if you can get past your reading impairment to actually read what it says…
“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that governmental officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.” – Ibid.
January 15th, 2009 at 7:10 pmThere is a lack of clarity on just what this order alters. Today the President can wiretap for something like 72 hours without a warrant. At the end of that period the President either needs to submit a request to FISA or end the wiretap.
It also doesn’t address the issue of data mining of domestic calls of Americans. This is the issue the telecom’s faced where they captured internal calls without a wiretap Qwest was the only one that balked at providing the switches to generate the data.
January 15th, 2009 at 10:03 pmwiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a court order is unconstitutional! It is a CRIME period!
January 15th, 2009 at 10:16 pmTracy__5 Says:
Maybe they finally realized that the whole “time table” problem with getting warrants issued is valid.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There IS no timetable issue. You can get a FISA warrant up to 72hrs AFTER the wiretap
January 16th, 2009 at 12:45 amTracy__5 Says:
“Nah, it couldn’t be that because the “time table” problem is a fantasy.”
Not according to these FISA judges….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Funny I didnt read ANYTHING in that article about time constraints.
January 16th, 2009 at 12:51 amTracy__5 Says:
For what reason would that need the a warrants after the information is intercepted and used?….or can it not be used untill that warrant is issued. Yeah…as if that ever happened or should have ever been required.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wow that was dumb. Yes warrants HAVE been obtained AFTER the wiretap. The point is OVERSIGHT. Getting the warrant even AFTER the wiretap begins is first leaving a paper trail of WHO was wiretapped outside of the Executive Branch and Second shows that they understand warrants ARE required. This is actually pretty simple
January 16th, 2009 at 12:53 amLeonard Pitts Jr. wants George W. Bush to live long to be around to hear history itself tell Bush what an awful president he was.
Well, that would be a good reason to wish Bush longevity.
One might also wish Bush longevity if Bush is sentenced to prison for the rest of his life.
In that case, Bush would hopefully live long to be confronted with punitive consequences relative to his criminal activities.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE ANTI-BUSH SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/2008/10/bush-is-worst-president-in-american.html
January 16th, 2009 at 2:34 amThomas Tamm is a hero for ratting out Bush and exposing Bush’s illegal NSA spying program.
“There are few viewpoints, if there are any, which trigger more fervent agreement across the political and media establishment than the view that George Bush, Dick Cheney and other top officials should not be criminally investigated, let alone prosecuted, for the various laws they have broken over the last eight years. Conversely, in the Beltway world, few things will render you ‘Unserious’ as quickly and irrevocably as arguing that Bush officials should be held accountable under the rule of law for their multiple violations of criminal statutes. Everyone from Cass Sunstein and Ruth Marcus to David Broder and Stuart Taylor valiantly stands up and defends the President and his top aides against the terribly uncouth and disruptive suggestion that their crimes merit investigation and prosecution. [. . .]”
“Thomas Tamm is the mid-level, career Justice Department lawyer who, in 2004, blew the whistle on Bush’s illegal NSA spying program by alerting The New York Times’ Eric Lichtblau to the fact that Bush was eavesdropping on Americans without the warrants required by law. He then watched his life be virtually destroyed by the FBI’s ensuing — and still ongoing — criminal investigation into this disclosure. Last month, Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff wrote a detailed account of what Tamm did and why, and how his life has unraveled as a result. I had been exchanging emails with Tamm for several months prior to that and the extent to which his life has been shattered as a result of his heroic whistle-blowing is truly amazing.”
Glenn Greenwald. (2009, January 8). The DOJ pursues the “real criminal” in the NSA spying scandal. http://www.salon.com/. Retrieved January 8, 2009, from http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/07/tamm/
Thomas Tamm is a hero for ratting out Bush and exposing Bush’s illegal NSA spying program.
It is really bewildering why the Department of Justice is investigating Tamm when it should be investigating those responsible for the illegal NSA spying activities.
Bush is like an idiot. Bush knew or should have known that too many people had known about the existence of his illegal NSA spying program. Bush knew or should have known that one or more people would eventually rat out Bush and expose Bush and ruin Bush.
Thomas Tamm did just that.
Thomas Tamm is one of my role models.
Thomas Tamm is great.
Bush is a fool: Bush kept on pursuing his illegal NSA spying program with no plan relative to its harm to his reputation pursuant to exposure.
The American people should thank Thomas Tamm from the bottom of their hearts for responsibly ratting out Bush.
Had Thomas Tamm not ratted out Bush, the American people would not even have known that so many of them were being illegally spied upon.
Bush must be punished.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE ANTI-BUSH SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/2008/10/bush-is-worst-president-in-american.html
January 16th, 2009 at 2:41 amTracy__5 Says:
Oh so it’s just a matter of getting the warrant so that the information collected could be used in court IF it ever has to be used in court. This has nothing to do with listening the foreign nationals on the other end because American laws regarding listening to them legally or illegally don’t apply to them, just if the government decides to prosecute an American citizen that might be on the line. I was more referring to the front lines i.e. using that information to intercept and foil terrorist plots.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
you are still missing the point. There ALWAYS needs to be oversight. I dont care if the warrants are after the fact. I care that THERE ARE WARRANTS. That way A) It complies with the fourth amendment and B) There is a paper trail OUTSIDE the Executive Branch so that if they decide to wiretap political opponents or reporters or their brother in law it is KNOWN and cant be covered up. I do not TRUST government without oversights and yes if this were Clinton or Obama or the most liberal president imaginable I would still be saying the same thing.
January 17th, 2009 at 12:58 am